So the TIMSS results published last week show a very strong performance for England.
We should be pleased, particularly considering Covid sat between the last tests and this one. Most nations were expecting a drop, but we are one of the highest scoring european countries across both age phases. Academics are rightly pointing to some of the areas of concern underneath the data, particularly around widening gaps across different groups, and that should absolutely be a focus moving forward (again 😮‍💨), but these results are overall a good indicator of a (comparatively) strong maths edu system.

It comes at a cost of course. Hubs are expensive, a lot of resource poured into maths edu arguably means resource loss elsewhere, & unless we can convincingly close the gaps in attainment, there's going to be an increasingly legitimate question over whether things like the 'mastery' approach are helping those who are falling behind - which is precisely what mastery advocates are attempting to prevent in the first place.

Of course, we cannot assume every child tested was 'mastery taught', and it's clear that there's a spectrum of interpretation of what that even means. Also, we can't ignore covid impact.

It seems unlikely though, that with these performances on the international stage, that mastery style teaching is going to lose its momentum or adoption any time soon (i think that's generally a good thing). Far more likely though is that other nations come knocking to try and emulate our education system a la Finland which should be approached with caution, but it always happens, and we do it too.

For what it's worth I feel like some of the things that would have the most impact on closing gaps in maths would be:

1) A more nuanced approach in KS1 leaning harder into EYFS strategies.

2) Resource shuffled around to better serve intervention in KS1. I'm becoming convinced that AI (don't roll your eyes) may have a useful role (but not an exclusive one!) in this, working alongside teachers or teaching assistants to suggest intervention strategies at a granular level.

3) Sensible reduction & re-evaluation of content in each key stage, with clear guidance on why that content is there, & where / how it builds up concepts (the curric. review will likely, i hope, achieve this). Slight aside, but the foundation maths course at KS4 is particularly in need of a complete rethink.

4) Deeper understanding (and subsequent informed actions) of issues around KS2/3 transition and the Year 7 'problem'. I'm impressed with the work and focus in this area by Axiom, Maths Horizons and others. I think the Observatory project at Nottingham Uni will be very important in this area too.

Finally, international tests are just one thing, and arguably a silly thing we shouldn't pay too much attention to - but we really should be enormously pleased about these results. They are amazing, and a brilliant spotlight on the hard work and expertise of teachers in this country. 👏